Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/John Barrymore/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

John Barrymore edit

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
John Barrymore was a truly great actor. Possibly the finest thespian America has ever produced, his 1925 Hamlet was a huge success and he was lauded by fellow thesps such as John Gielgud and Orson Welles. Behind the mask lay a very different and damaged creature who had been an alcoholic from the age of 14. His drinking, and his destructive behaviour wrecked four marriages, his career and his reputation. He ended his career playing parodies of himself in shoddy B-movies in order to pay off some of his huge debts.

This article has gone through a substantial re-write recently, since which Ssilvers has been very generous with his time and effort in both ensuring it reads well, and is correctly done in American English (a little alien for me to get completely right throughout!) Any and all comments that will aid this article's progress towards FAC standard are welcomed. - SchroCat (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Tim riley edit

Very little from me, simply because it's a beautifully constructed article, splendidly sourced and immensely readable. I had already looked at it during work-in-progress, and it was no hardship to read it a second time for PR. Nor will it be one to read it a third time at FAC.

  • Early life: 1882–1903
    • "begin acting on a professional basis" – professionally?
  • Early stage career: 1903–13
    • "Thaw plead insanity" – is plead really the past tense of plead in AmEng?
    • "a village idiot one spoken line" – missing a "with"?
    • "The Observer wrote that…" – you'll get the Boulton sleeve across your windpipe for that. BB is adamant that papers do not write themselves.
    • "It was his longest held role" – I think you want a hyphen here, but don't take my word for it.
      • How about something like "in the role he had his longest run"? -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • "In July 1912, Barrymore traveled to Los Angeles" – all told there are eight "traveled"s in the article, and one starts to notice them. Perhaps vary a few of them?
  • Entry into motion pictures, and theatrical triumphs: 1913–24
    • "was not the breakthrough that Barrymore wanted. After Barrymore took a holiday" – perhaps just "he" for the second "Barrymore"?
    • "which he later called "the worst film I ever made"" – how much later? Even after he had descended to the tacky stuff of his late career?
    • "a three film deal" – another possible place where a hyphen might be right.
  • Years of transition: 1932–36
  • Legacy
    • "Peters's" – BrEng-v-AmEng: as the text has the Ssilvers imprimatur I am probably mistaken in my belief that in AmEng this would usually be just ess-apostrophe, rather than ess-apostrophe-ess. I just mention it.
      • Tim is correct: we would drop the last "s" in this case. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources
    • Barrymore's Confessions of an Actor came out in 1926, and I think you should add the "origyear" field to the cite-book template here.
    • I notice you are inconsistent about whether to use 10- or 13-digit ISBNs. Personally I prefer the former, find the the latter clumping, lumpen things, but we are bidden to go for the 13-digit versions nonetheless. See Wikipedia:ISBN. There is a splendid tool for converting 10s to 13s here. (Later: it occurs to me that it was graceless of me not to add that I am indebted to User:Squeamish Ossifrage for these tips on ISBNs. Now added.)

That's my lot. A pleasure to read the article, and a pleasure to review it. Tim riley talk 22:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks for your help here. I've followed all your suggestions, with one exception that I still need to check (humanism v humanity). - SchroCat (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco comments edit

Image comments edit
  • All three Barrymores were in the US in 1904 - John didn't travel to the UK until April 1905. - SchroCat (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done - showing masthead and date; now replaced with the clean version. - SchroCat (talk) 15:14, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uploaded (and now replaced) the dated masthead - SchroCat (talk) 15:20, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK--the play was performed on Broadway in 1921. White Studios was "The" Broadway photographer back in the day. The site is from the University of South Carolina's College of Arts and Sciences, so the information about White should be a RS. We hope (talk) 05:12, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unknown. I was working under the assumption it was intended as a publicity photo, given the autograph (dated as 1922), etc. - SchroCat (talk) 22:35, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Got this from Tineye: photo and notes. Notes at left of page-Taken by Francis Bergman in 1922. Identified by Lark Taylor's note on the back of the Folger Shakespeare Library's copy of it. The publisher was Frank Walter Bergmann (1898-1977). Not sure how much of this you want on the file description, so posted it here. BTW--bottom of page says that non-Folger copyrighted items are CC 4.0 Attribution, Share-Alike International licensed as long as the Folger Library is credited. We hope (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was in two minds over this. It's an American artist, drawing an American actor in 1923 (in the US), so it should be OK in the US, but the only publishing I culd see was February 1925, so a {{PD-1923}} didn't seem right. Any thoughts? - SchroCat (talk) 16:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, did you see the source directly? Was there a copyright registration in the US? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:14, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've seen the original in the ILN (copy emailed to you). No idea on the US copyright: I'll have a look. -SchroCat (talk) 17:20, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a copyright notice there (somewhat cropped). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:37, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't find a US registration for it tho. The ILN, being a UK publication, would have assumed copyright, given the fact there is no registration process in the UK. - SchroCat (talk) 19:23, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd mention that you didn't find any copyright registration for Sargent. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just checked Upenn books for 1925 in artwork and Sargent didn't register the drawing. Have noted this on the file-now back to Grand Hotel :) We hope (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't find a copyright registration for the 1931 film (something for the '55 film, but not '31). There are a few online sources (including the two in the licence info) as well as the one towards the bottom here.
I found a copy of the still published in July 1931 Screenland magazine. The copyright for the magazine wasn't renewed. I changed the information on the Commons file to that re: Screenland. We hope (talk) 20:09, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like I'll be uploading the full video then :D — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Crisco 1492, Some checking at both UPenn and copyright.gov showed a 1958 renewal and another "block renewal" for 1700+ films in 1982 with Grand Hotel in it. The trailer at at IMDB shows a 1932 notice 29 seconds into it. MGM did, however, take out multi page ads in the trade papers with photos from the film. Most can be matched to better quality stills for copies. This one File:Garbo - Barrymore 1932.jpg in John Barrymore on stage, screen and radio has nothing to back up the PD claim with. There's a similar photo in the ad that will work there. Let me see what can be made from what's at Lantern and identical copies of stills. We hope (talk) 16:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Best of luck with that... frightening prospect. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:18, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I hate block registrations/renewals! Will see what can be put together and post the file links here. We hope (talk) 16:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, these are the ones from Grand Hotel that include John Barrymore:
  • Hmmm... not looking good for this one. Although the original source shows no copyright notice (so the uploader has acted in good faith here), this eBay sale has text at the bottom. It's too small to read, but I'll put good money on one of those being a copyright notice. - SchroCat (talk) 15:06, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. I've been trying to find some way of resolving this, but no dice: looks like it's not PD (as far as I can see). - SchroCat (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • First the bad news (which was suspected)-the card does have a copyright notice. Take a look at this one from the set. At bottom left is the notice, then Country of origin USA and the standard Paramount rider about the item being leased from them. However, the still was published in an ad before the film was released. Motion Picture Herald December 11, 1937 Here's where the multi-page ad starts. Photo is on the next page at upper left. The film was released December 24, 1937. Paramount also provided a copy of the photo to Motion Picture Herald for their March 19, 1938 issue (bottom left). It's credited to Paramount but no copyright information was printed with it. A check of the UPenn books for periodical renewals for 1965 and 1966 shows the magazine wasn't renewed. My thought would be that the film still from the lobby card would be in the public domain because of the above and could be used in the article if desired. While it can be argued that the design and artwork of the copyright-marked lobby card is still protected, the still went into the public domain with the publication of the ad in MPH. We hope (talk) 05:39, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • But, to be safe, I'd just use the film still. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Prose comments edit
  • He began his career in 1903 - but he had previous performances?
  • He did, but thery were one-offs to help father and sister out of a hole. He was still set on his career as an artist at the time. - SchroCat (talk) 11:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1897 was an emotionally challenging year for Barrymore: he lost his virginity when he was seduced by his step-mother, Mamie Floyd, - When did Barrymore Sr. remarry? Also, if he was caught in a brothel, would we be comfortable saying that he lost his virginity?
  • Slightly clarified: the story is that he was waiting there while his friends were otherwise engaged upstairs. It's possibly not true (according to Morrison), as it was Barrymore himself who says he lost his virginity to his step mother. Either way, it's a little too Jeremy Kyle/Jerry Springer! - SchroCat (talk) 14:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following year, ... - Three years in three sentences.
  • Why doesn't young Barrymore imitate a real actor if he must copy someone. - Period or question mark?
  • (Just checked the source once again), full stop. - SchroCat (talk) 12:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In late 1913, Barrymore made his first feature film, - mention that it's his first confirmed film?
  • she fell in love with a poet during their extended stay in Venice. - which poet? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:45, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • the first performance of which the Manchester Guardian later described as "the most memorable first night for years" - repeated first.
  • In February 1928, Barrymore obtained a quiet divorce from Oelrichs; she eagerly agreed to the separation, as she was in a relationship with a lawyer, Harrison Tweed, whom she later married. - Not on the grounds of adultery, one would assume? Then why?
  • The sources don't give the formal reason for the divroce, possibly because it wasn't known. It was obtained in Paris and Barrymore refused to leak any info about it. - SchroCat (talk) 09:35, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • A bit heavy on Peters' opinions. Contemporary reviews, maybe? Heaven knows a lot of them are online.
  • To do, post review
  • in which he co-starred with Lionel - perhaps reintroduce Lionel as his brother? It's been 14 years, narratively
  • RKO replaced him with Ricardo Cortez - Seems like this should be mentioned in text, not a footnote
  • A newspaper editor chartered a plane and flew her to Chicago, to meet Barrymore's train; - flew Costello or Barrie?
  • To minimize disruption to the schedule, the studio put Barrymore in Kelley's Rest Home, a sanatorium for alcoholics, but he continued to drink covertly and was disruptive on set. - Disruption -- Disruptive
  • Don't think you've linked Barrymore's children.
  • Subsequent to his comments on the available literature, Morrison - This could be read as Morrion having made the comments — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tweaked - SchroCat (talk) 10:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Huge thanks, Crisco. Much appreciated as always. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Brianboulton edit

Just a trio of minor gripes for the moment; I hope to have more time after this evening, and will add a little more then.

  • Lead: "Barrymore's personal life has been the subject of much attention before and since his death." Indeed, but this reads like an unnecessary editorial observation, and it is not as far as I can see a matter supported in the article.
  • I'd say it probably is supported: we have references in there to his private life being played out in the tabloids, and the Portrayals and characterizations section shows a number of specific examples.
  • In the Early life section, I think you need to add a little more information concerning the adoption of the Barrymore name. At present you say that John was born John Blyth, the son of Maurice Barrymore and Georgie Drew Barrymore – so why, the reader may wonder, was he born "Blyth"? The answer is of course that "Barrymore" was Maurice's stage name, which John and his siblings adopted for their own acting careers. This needs to be noted. I imagine that the name Barrymore was formally adopted at some stage, and that the later Barrymores, e.g. John Drew Barrymore and Drew Barrymore were actually called Barrymore; any information on that would be useful.
  • Will go through the sources. I'm not sure there is anything along the lines of a timescale, but I am fairly sure there is something about his reasoning. - SchroCat (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not particularly concerned about the later Barrymores – their use of the name is really a matter for their articles. But the fact that "Barrymore" was initially a stage name does I think need to be noted. Brianboulton (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC
  • Incidentally, I have gleaned from his Times obit that in private life he continued to call himself "Blyth" (ref details available if required). I am now working on the review proper. Brianboulton (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added info on Maurice's adoption of the stage name, as well as dealing with the Maurice/founder point below too: hopefully it reads OK. I'm struggling to find something that deals specifically with when John adopted the name, but will keep searching. - SchroCat (talk) 07:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Times info is odd, and I'm not sure I've seen it in the other sources. I've got one of the sources (Kobler, who knew Barrymore well) say that while B was at school, he signed his name Jack S Barrymore. I'll keep looking to see if I can get some clarity on this. - SchroCat (talk) 09:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maurice was the founder of the Barrymore acting dynasty rather than a prominent member of it. The Drews, however, were well established before Georgiana, although they appear to have died out, save through the Barrymores.

Brianboulton (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More comments

This is the first instalment of my main review, covering the first three main sections

Early life
  • Should "Arch Street Theatre" be "theater"? There seems to be inconsistency in the use of American spelling, but maybe there's a reason for this?
  • Many US theatres adopted the British spelling, including Arch Street (see the Library of Congress images). I've kept their correct names as provided in the sources, while using "theater" as the default. - SchroCat (talk) 12:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In October 1882, the family went on a season's tour with the Polish actress Helena Modjeska, and the following year his parents again toured with Modjeska, although they left their children behind". Do we know where they toured?
  • "they remained in Britain performing" – last word unnecessary
  • Do we have the date/year he started school? Presumably after their return to the US in 1886.
  • Presumably, but I can't find confirmation in the sources - SchroCat (talk) 06:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggested rephrase: "The following year Barrymore's mother died from tuberculosis when he was 11 years old;" → "The following year, when Barrymore was 11 years old, his mother died from tuberculosis;"
  • Perhaps you should mention the advent of a stepmother before the seduction episode - who was she, etc?
  • I've dropped this in as a footnote: enough, do you think, or do you think it preferable in the body? - SchroCat (talk) 06:35, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a bit confused with years: in 1898 he joined KCS Wimbledon. A year later, i.e. 1899, he goes to the Slade, which he leaves after a year's formal study. That brings us to 1900. There then follows an unspecified period of riotous living in London. Then, in the summer of 1900, he "returns" to London; when did he leave it? By November he is back in America, employed in New York. This seems an awful lot of very rapid to-ing and fro-ing, when you couldn't just nip on a plane. Did you mean that he returned to New York, not London, in the summer? That would make sense.
  • Yes—mea culpa—he returned from London. - SchroCat (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1906, White was murdered by Nesbit's husband..." Better to say "shot" than "murdered", as I understand that Thaw was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity.
  • Overlong/complex sentence beginning: "Barrymore expected to testify..." etc
  • The words "It turned out that" can safely be dropped.
  • "even though she was also paying for their father's care" → perhaps: "who was also paying for their father's care"?
Early stage career: 1903–13
  • Are you sure about the pipelink on Criterion Theatre, which seems to go to a different Broadway theatre – Hammerstein's Olympia. There's no indication anywhere that the Criterion Theatre of 1907 was part of this complex.
  • Is "double-bill" a hyphenated term? Also, I think the term "double bill" refers to the plays rather than the roles. Thus: "Barrymore appeared at the Criterion Theatre in a double bill of works by J. M. Barrie..." etc
  • Could we have a date for his appearance in His Excellency the Governor, to maintain the chronology, and also an indication as to where this took place?
  • Likewise, where did he appear in The Boys of Company B? Rather than reiterating this point, may I suggest that generally a little more detail as to where Barrymore acted on stage would be helpful.
  • Done for Company B. - SchroCat (talk) 07:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post review: I'll go through and fill in some other gaps. - SchroCat (talk) 08:48, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...Edward Sheldon, who would "reshape ... [Barrymore's] entire career and, in the words of producer-director Arthur Hopkins, take him 'up to the high mountain'." Maybe just a personal view, but I found this awkward reading – an un-named source quoting the words of another source, so that there is some initial doubt as to who is saying what. It may be possible to play with this for greater clarity.
  • I've removed the "high mountain" part, which makes it cleaner and clearer. - SchroCat (talk) 21:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "according to both Morrison and Norton" – who is "Norton? Not listed in sources – presumably "Norden"?
Entry into motion pictures, and theatrical triumphs: 1913–24
  • I'd rephrase final sentence of the first para: "Except for The Incorrigible Dukane, all these early films are presumed lost".
  • "he returned with another serious stage role" → "he returned to take another serious stage role" Was this also at the Eltinge?
  • One doesn't "take" a role in AmEng, I'm reliably informed. - SchroCat (talk) 08:48, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps link "suffragist"
  • There could be problems with the unattributed descriptions "self-confident, spirited"
  • "In 1921, Barrymore portrayed a wealthy Frenchman arriving in New York in The Lotus Eater opposite a gold-digging Colleen Moore". Needs a spot more punctuation, and possibly a bit of rearranging.
  • "Barrymore decided next to star in Hamlet..." – I'd make it clear at this point that this was a stage role.
  • "run" appears three times in the brief final paragraph

To be resumed Brianboulton (talk) 12:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Part two
Films with the major studios: 1924–32
  • Year of Beau Brummell?
  • Link on "the lead"? Surely commonly understood?
  • The link leads to Brummel, rather than just the generic term. - SchroCat (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although the film was "interesting, though not an unqualified success", according to Peters..." – "Although" closely followed by "though" reads poorly. I'd simplify to "Although according to Peters the film was not an unqualified success..."
  • Maybe indicate that Gielgud was aged only 20 at the time?
  • Overuse of terminal "instead". e.g. "Dolores Costello was cast instead" closely followed by "...the film's producer, signed Astor instead".
  • Swapped one, deleted one, left one - SchroCat (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After his third film in the Warner Bros. contract, When a Man Loves, with Costello this time, Barrymore joined United Artists (UA) under a three-film deal, for the next three years, and "enjoyed unprecedented prosperity and spent lavishly", according to Morrison." An overcomplex sentence which should be split, e.g.: "After completing his Warner Bros. contract with When a Man Loves, alongside Costllo, Barrymore joined United Artists (UA) under a three-film deal. For the next three years, according to Morrison, he "enjoyed unprecedented prosperity and spent lavishly".
  • Pipelink here for "skeet range"
Years of transition: 1932–36
  • "Critical opinion of the acting was divided" – does this mean Barrymore's acting? A further issue is that of the two following examples, which are linked by "although", only the first seems to be a criticism of the acting, and that only marginally
  • "Filming was stopped on one occasion after over 25 takes" – "after over" is an awkward pairing: perhaps "after more than"?
  • "Norden considered" – earlier we have "Norden notes". There should be consistency in the use of tenses.
  • "He underwent screen tests and hired Carrington to act as vocal coach again, but during one session, his memory failed him again..." Close repetition of "again"
  • "He soon had a mental and physical breakdown" – I'd reword this: "Soon afterwards he suffered a ..."
  • "opines" is a word to be used with extreme frugality; my informal rule is never more than once in an article. This is the third (including once in a footnote), so I'd be inclined to replace at leaet one of them.
  • More generally, I found the detail in the final paragraph a little excessive, for example I'd delete "A newspaper editor chartered a plane and flew her to Chicago, to meet Barrymore's train" and perhaps find another word for "chase"
  • Swapped chase for pursuit. I've mulled over the plane episode and decided to leave it in there: the whole thing was played out in the US media at the time, and did much to add to the Barrymore 'legend' and affected his image in the pubic's eye. - SchroCat (talk) 22:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whose comment is the quoted "with aplomb and a sense of humor"? – there are two citations at the sentence's end.

The remaining sections should be done tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks for all this so far: RL has been slightly hectic this week, but I'll be making a start on these and other comments later on today. Thanks again - SchroCat (talk) 14:25, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Final sections
Decline and death: 1936–42
  • The 1923 image seems a little out of place in this section
  • "when he next had a supporting role..." the word "next" seems superfluous
  • "the studios reacted positively with offers of work, including appearances in nine films in 1937 and 1938, including as Colonel Nielson in three Bulldog Drummond films..." Repetition of "including" – the first should be replaced by "which led to". In any event I would split this overlong sentence.
  • "he worked conscientiously on the films and honored his debts." Two separate things; perhaps should be expanded to "...and as a consequence was able to honor his debts"
  • "a spoof of his life in the run up to My Dear Children. I'm not sure I understand what this means. His life in the weeks or months prior to the production? His whole life up to that point?
  • Should there be a closing quote after "his talent at cut-rate"?
  • "Shortly before his death, Barrymore returned to the faith of the Catholic Church". This is the only mention of Catholicism – if he "returned" to it, there ought to be a passing mention of it in the Early life section.
  • Yep - Put in his conversion to - SchroCat (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The final paragraph of the section is basically tributes, and might be better placed in the next section. It is not noticeably different in tone from the first paragraph of the later section.
Legacy
  • "is a member of" is an odd way of referring to a long-dead actor. Perhaps "is included in"?
  • Third para first line: as I read it, "following" should be "followed"
  • "authorized study" – "authorized by whom?
  • Publication year for Morrison's Shakespearean Actor book?
  • "Loy and Barrie" – it's ages since Loy was mentioned, so I think I'd reintroduce her a bit here, and name them th other way round, e.g. "Barrie and his one-time co-star Myrna Loy".
  • Since they have been mentioned copiously, it might be worth mentioning when Lionel and Ethel died, also Elaine Barrie.
Portrayals and characterizations
  • Where was I Hate Hamlet staged?
  • "Barrymore, a two-person play by William Luce, premiered in 1996, which depicts Barrymore shortly before his death in 1942 as he is rehearsing a revival of his Richard III." This is not grammatical as it stands. Perhaps "was" before "premiered", and replace "which" with "and"?
  • Last paragraph: if I were you I begin the paragraph with the information on the Fields film, and make the Flynn and its extended critical quote the last lines of the article. This would be a lot more powerful than the present ending.
General
  • There is only one link to the list of Barrymore's stage and screen, and that is the "see also" in the "Early stage career" section. The list is relevant to the whole article, and should thus be appropriately placed – perhaps at the head of the "Legacy" section.

I can see that a great deal of work has gone into this article. I hope my comments and suggestions here are helpful, also the few minor edits I have made to the text. Brianboulton (talk) 23:42, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • As always, many, many thanks for all your time and effort here. Ive addressed some of the points, and will work on the rest shortly, possibly after a closed PR. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to one and all: a very useful PR and I've covered most of the comments. There are a couple of more comments that need some in-depth work that I'll work on pre-FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 23:08, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/John_Barrymore/archive1&oldid=1142590077"